Also, the posts signed by DD himself are either not written by him or show a worrying liking for writing in the third person. Not that I expect him to be blogging; but it seems a bit odd to say it is when it obviously isn't.

I understand Iain's reticence but it is nearly 5 months since the elections. The Liberals in Norfolk will have found someone else to target. I hope that Iain will restart his interactive blog - even if it is after the leadership election.

A great improvement on the DD campaign website - actually looks as if it a) belongs to 2005, and b) belongs on the web, unlike the other one which gives the appearance of a scanned eighties leaflet. (Cameron's one is better, but it's pure PR stuff. So vacuous that its slick look actually emphasis that there's nothing else.)

Now if they DD blog smart it will be a true blog, not take itself too seriously, and give a real flavour of the campaign. Express yourself, and let people in, don't treat them as an audience to be patronised.

- but why not? Why do we assume he couldn't/shouldn't do it? Why is being 'out there' such a dangerous thing? I'm convinced that the politicians people truly like and support are the ones who manage to seem like people with vulnerabilities as well as strengths.

"Surprisingly they've also linked to politicalbetting.com, the editor of which has been less than complementary about Davis and I believe backs Ken Clarke."

I disagree. Mike Smithson, editor of the generally excellent and always informative politicalbetting site, tends to talk up Davis and often creates the impression, intentional or otherwise, that the other contenders are wasting their time.

"I disagree. Mike Smithson, editor of the generally excellent and always informative politicalbetting site, tends to talk up Davis and often creates the impression, intentional or otherwise, that the other contenders are wasting their time."

I know that politicalbetting.com is excellent and informative and I'm not accusing it of bias, I'm just saying that comments by the editor such as the following are hardly positive:

"I was flabbergasted by how inarticulate David Davis was...How can someone be taken seriously as a leadership candidate if he cannot put himself over effectively."

"He has such little name recognition because he acts and talks just like another middle-aged man in a suit. I follow politics closely and I cannot recall Commons appearance, a turn of phrase, a speech, an interview or something that he has written that is MEMORABLE. He fails to make an impact...I would rate him behind Clarke, Rifkind, Cameron and even Liam Fox on these counts."

"If only DD had 5% of Ken’s confidence and personality then you would be onto a winner. Sadly for the Tory party DD is probably going to get it and we’ll be having the same discussion here in September 2009...DD - Mister Non-Personality - Mister Boring - Mister Labour Fourth Election Victory - Mister Loser"

We'll have to agree to disagree because I just found it strange that DD would link to someone who expresses such views.

On the other hand Mike is consistently hostile to Charles Kennedy and some would argue that he has been broadly wrong about him - he has a particular idea of what one must be to be a successful political leader in an electoral sense (basically Tony Blair) and anyone who does not fit in with that is no good. Others would say that the appeal of Tony Blair has run its course - most of his "triumphs" these days are in short-term tactical successes which get well received in the media, but the election showed that the electorate do not share the same view.

It's a shame that Smithson has taken to Davis bashing. Yes, we know he's a LibDem and an ex-BBC man to boot (see eg http://www.guardian.co.uk/Columnists/Column/0,5673,1456391,00.html ), but until recently he seemed to stand above the mudslinging. And PoliticalBetting was all the better because of that.

I guess like many hardcore LDs, he just finds the prospect of Prime Minister Davis so appalling that he's got to do what he can to stop it.

But I wish he'd calm down and get back to his more balanced self. Apart from anything else, he must realise that advice from him is likely to be counterproductive among us Tories.

The fact that Davis supporters view anyone who attacks there hero as either a pinko/Liberal or a BBC employee shows where the party is heading if Davis becomes leader. Back to the days when if you weren`t one of us so to speak you were nothing less than a non-person!
Forth, Conway and Davis are not going to unite the party they are going to turn it into a later day poliburo where dissent isn`t tolerated.

Ok I'll hold my hands up and admit I was referring to the coverage of the contest on the politicalbetting frontpage, which does tend to talk up Davis's prospects. I was not aware of Mike Smithson's other comments so therefore my post was, um, 'misinformed'.